Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 426 posts

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#271

Post by [deleted] »

eridius wrote: post #169
zdragnar wrote: post #24

I'll never understand why lawmakers think that fruit and other flavorings for tobacco are aimed at getting kids hooked. It's almost like they think no adult has ever enjoyed fruit or candy, and that making teens smoke plain cigarettes will keep them from being rebellious. I've tried almost every variation of ecigarette mod out there except mechanical mods, because I'm not an idiot enough to know I'm too much of an id…

Adults like flavored nicotine too, but have you seen the ads? They're blatantly targeted at kids. Hell, I saw one once that showed a vape plugged into the USB port of a kid's laptop in class, where the advertising was basically saying your teacher won't know it's a vape.

[deleted]

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#272

Post by newen »

elhudy wrote: post #240
NeedMoreTea wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's so much unheated air accompanying the vapour, through the air vents, that my recollection of vaping is it wasn't even warm. I'm sure there is a temperature difference after the vaporiser, but I never noticed it. Completely unlike smoking where you often noticed it was hot. Sounds like something for a Youtuber to measure. :) I never tried a Juul, just regular mods and vape pens if that makes a difference.

Interesting. I always thought hot air was the mechanism that causes a cough. Maybe it is just the lack of oxygen.

It's more likely particles that causes coughing.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#273

Post by Reedx »

bcp2384 wrote: post #18

Convinced part of the problem with political offices is that elected politicians have no incentive to actually consider second order or third order effects of any piece of legislation they pass. Everything is optimized for first order effects only e.g. optics because that is what they think "shows" they did something.

Exactly, this is a major problem. If anything, they're incentivized to not use second-order thinking, because most voters don't. Plus it's more complicated to communicate second-order effects.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#274

Post by 100100010001 »

nilkn wrote: post #183
pigscantfly wrote: post #7

This is perverse given that tobacco cigarettes are still widely available. I can't remember the last time I was actually satisfied with a decision from the Board of Supervisors.

While I don't live in SF or even CA, I'll try to offer an explanation of why this might make sense based on what I've observed. I'm 29, which puts me sort of at the intersection of two age groups right now. I'm starting to be able to connect with older folks, and I can still connect with younger 20somethings. Nobody I know under 25 smokes cigarettes. Anecdotally, cigarettes in that age group are nearly universally ab…

I do live I the Bay Area and I know more people 21-25 who smoke cigarettes than vape. See... anecdotal evidence is easy to find a counterpoint to.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#277

Post by sitkack »

phil248 wrote: post #182
r00fus wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'll never understand why lawmakers think that fruit and other flavorings for tobacco are aimed at getting kids hooked. Do you have kids? They love what their friends have, and really really like candy flavors.

Yes, but adults also really like candy flavors. Should we no longer be permitted by the state to drink mojitos or Moscow mules because they also happen to be delicious? You also did not provide a response to the text you quoted. Why does having kids, or knowing that they like candy flavors, mean that all flavored things are aimed at children?

> mojitos or Moscow mules

When kids start demanding moscow mules, I'll give them a free copper cup.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#278

Post by cgiles »

bmer wrote: post #108

I do not understand why this thread is so against this legislation. Issues with e-cigarettes: 1) they bypass laws regarding cigarette advertising: compare e-cig packaging with cigarette packaging; this is problematic, especially for youth (the non-users most likely to be vulnerable to advertising for such products) 2) contrary to what is portrayed, they are not interested in helping people quit tobacco usage: tobacco…

Because, at best, it is a very dubious and hamhanded way to solve a problem that is ill-defined.

Is the problem advertising, or advertising to minors, of nicotine products? Then ban that.

Is the problem that minors are able to buy vapes even though they shouldn't be able to? Then strengthen enforcement (ah, but that costs money).

Is the problem that some vape products are too easily smuggled into schools and look like USB sticks? Fine, then set a minimum size requirement on vaping devices. Heck, mandate they be colored a bright primary color.

Who cares what Juul or the tobacco industry says? They will say whatever they need to say to sell stuff, we know that. What matters is that vaping is substantially less harmful than tobacco by all accounts.

Personally, I could potentially get behind a total ban on tobacco, as it is very harmful and costly to society, although I'm generally anti-prohibition. But what makes no sense in any possible universe is banning vaping while keeping cigarettes legal.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#279

Post by ceejayoz »

drawkbox wrote: post #262
pigscantfly wrote: post #7

This is perverse given that tobacco cigarettes are still widely available. I can't remember the last time I was actually satisfied with a decision from the Board of Supervisors.

I don't entirely understand the attacks on e-cigs and vaping. 1) e-cigs/vaping is safer with less carcinogens going into lungs. That will lead to less health issues down the line. Even if kids are getting them, which they shouldn't because it is sold in an age limited regulated market, it is still safer than cigarettes and a regulated market with good production is always safer than an unregulated black market. 2) va…

It's quite simple. Not smoking at all > vaping > cigarettes.

Massive progress has been made in getting kids not to take up smoking. If you're a smoker, switching to vaping is a good thing. If you're not, it's a bad thing.

Re: San Francisco Becomes First U.S. City to Pass an E-Cigarette Ban

#280

Post by kalleboo »

zdragnar wrote: post #186
graphememes wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because kids love candy. Adults do too, but kids much more.

That's strange, I haven't seen any calls for bans for wine, wine coolers, candy flavored liquors, beers made with fruit such as lambics, etc. Kids under 16 aren't old enough to drive, and yet there are plenty of toys shaped like cars and trucks. Toy guns, movies involving gun violence without R ratings, saturday morning cartoons, television featuring people consuming alcohol, etc. All of the above can have just as ba…

> That's strange, I haven't seen any calls for bans for wine, wine coolers, candy flavored liquors, beers made with fruit such as lambics, etc.

When Alcopops gained prominence in Europe, there was a huge outrage and much talk of bans. In the US, the FTC has investigated the link between wine coolers and underage drinking several times. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcopop

Post reply on HN